CSLB Contractor's Law & Business Practice Exam

In the scenario involving John Meyers and his son Bart, what is true regarding Bart's ability to sue for negligence after his injury?

1. He can sue as a matter of course.

2. He cannot sue if his father is insured.

3. He can sue regardless of workers' compensation issues.

4. He can only sue if he was not working on-site.

The correct answer is: He cannot sue if his father is insured.

In this scenario, the correct choice highlights the relationship between insurance and the ability to pursue a negligence claim. In many cases, if an employee is injured while working for a contractor, workers' compensation laws generally provide remedies that limit the ability to sue the employer for negligence. If the father, John Meyers, has provided appropriate workers' compensation insurance, it typically protects him from personal liability for injuries sustained by his son, Bart, while working. This means that Bart would generally be precluded from suing his father for negligence because the insurance is intended to cover workplace injuries, thus providing a system of compensation without needing to prove fault or negligence on the part of the employer. Other options present various scenarios that could imply either a misunderstanding of workers' compensation laws or suggest a condition that wouldn't automatically apply in negligence cases. For example, the idea of being able to sue as a matter of course ignores the protective nature of workers’ compensation, while stating he can sue regardless of workers' compensation issues may not hold up if coverage is in place. The notion of being allowed to sue only if he was not working on-site could also misinterpret the legal protections extended when someone is acting within the scope of their employment. Therefore, understanding how insurance interacts with negligence